The following excerpt is from U.S. v. Lemon, 550 F.2d 467 (9th Cir. 1977):
This court, in de Kaplany v. Enomoto, 540 F.2d 975, at 987 (9th Cir. 1976) (en banc) identified three alternate standards by which to review the performance of counsel: (1) whether counsel's performance was "so poor and incompetent as to make the trial a farce or mockery of justice"; (2) "whether the circumstances show a denial of fundamental fairness"; and (3) whether there was a "lack of effective aid in the preparation and trial of the case lack of counsel likely to render and rendering reasonably effective assistance." None was violated here.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.